This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

I'm leaning towards jamesrage's and American's points made here. I agree with Sam W in that at one time those who could be described as liberals would never have given Ward Churchill the time of day. That's not the way it goes now. Does anyone doubt that Obama and Jimmy Carter both are leading liberals of the Democrat party. Both openly embrace dictators like Chavez, Castro, Ahmadinejad (yeah, they embrace him also), and, of course, the budding dictator Zelaya. Churchill just takes it slightly further - he's kind of the William Ayers of his time! More decent liberals in denial cannot admit just how warped Obama's and Carter's actions can be at times. Harry Reid said that the Iraq war was lost while it was being won while Murthra accused innocent US Marines of being war criminals (anyone remember that)... sort of reminds one of Jane Fonda in her younger years. Yep... the Democrats are truly the party of radical liberals and less radical liberals just have problems swallowing that pill!

I'm leaning towards jamesrage's and American's points made here. I agree with Sam W in that at one time those who could be described as liberals would never have given Ward Churchill the time of day. That's not the way it goes now. Does anyone doubt that Obama and Jimmy Carter both are leading liberals of the Democrat party. Both openly embrace dictators like Chavez, Castro, Ahmadinejad (yeah, they embrace him also), and, of course, the budding dictator Zelaya. Churchill just takes it slightly further - he's kind of the William Ayers of his time! More decent liberals in denial cannot admit just how warped Obama's and Carter's actions can be at times. Harry Reid said that the Iraq war was lost while it was being won while Murthra accused innocent US Marines of being war criminals (anyone remember that)... sort of reminds one of Jane Fonda in her younger years. Yep... the Democrats are truly the party of radical liberals and less radical liberals just have problems swallowing that pill!

As a moderate, I'd say that it looks to me like both parties are, to some degree, controlled by their extremists right now.

The moveon.org types, for instance, I find flat out insane. Ditto the Jerry Falwells of the world.

I have to ask. Can you explain in a coherent, supported, and factual basis to the statement:

Both openly embrace dictators like Chavez, Castro, Ahmadinejad (yeah, they embrace him also), and, of course, the budding dictator Zelaya

The reason I ask this is simply that you are almost in effect in the same bed as Ward Churchill: making emotionally tinged statements that feed to inner feelings without regards to any actual factual basis. This is what Ward Churchill has done, and by these statements you have done yourself.

Second, how would you go about addressing the fact that so many dictators have been openly embraced by Republicans as well?

I do not see a very strong embrace of Zelaya. In fact it seems that there has been a very tepid response indeed from this administration. Yet the fact remains that there has been a military coup that removed an elected president. The politics of the president should matter to no one, it is the principle that matters. I think the irony may be lost here.

As a moderate, I'd say that it looks to me like both parties are, to some degree, controlled by their extremists right now.

The moveon.org types, for instance, I find flat out insane. Ditto the Jerry Falwells of the world.

I'll accept Jerry Falwell's views and reject moveon.org's any day of the week... even though I don't want the religious right ever having the power to bring back blue laws or increased media censorship - Americans would not stand for that sort of imposed values. However, the mainstream media has done a fine job of censoring the views of most Americans and bring undeserved power to the radical left. There were over 1500 tea parties on the 4th of July weekend - did we see any evidence of that.

We do need a balance in this country and we're dangerously leaning way to the left these days. Take a look around the world and notice that it doesn't take much to go from liberty to a dictatorship. We're in trouble if Americans don't wake up and more fervently reject views like Churchill's!

I am objecting to the statement that gives a blanket address to all Liberals and applying that Ward Churchill is representative of Liberals. This is both false and dishonest implication.

So are the Neo-Nazis then representative of all conservatives? Should we disallow any conservative to teach in any school because of far right wingnuts?

Keep trying. That's why Ward Churchill gets mentioned at all. Talking heads bring out these anecdotal examples of the "American Left" and forum fodder parrot them here. Just look at the comments. A story gets posted about the nutty professor and in just a few posts we're treated to a goofy mini diatribe against the Democrat Party. classic.

Keep trying. That's why Ward Churchill gets mentioned at all. Talking heads bring out these anecdotal examples of the "American Left" and forum fodder parrot them here. Just look at the comments. A story gets posted about the nutty professor and in just a few posts we're treated to a goofy mini diatribe against the Democrat Party. classic.

welcome to the board Sam. some threads are a waste of time.

Get off your high horse. Are you trying to say the same thing doesn't happen when some idiotic hyper partisan, extreme right preacher comes out and says some bull**** that the left leaning people on this forum aren't immedietely flooding threads making the person out to be a representitive of "conservatives"?

Get off your high horse. Are you trying to say the same thing doesn't happen when some idiotic hyper partisan, extreme right preacher comes out and says some bull**** that the left leaning people on this forum aren't immedietely flooding threads making the person out to be a representitive of "conservatives"?

Let me know if anything I said was not true. Let me know if you see me saying anything resembling what you ask that I might be "trying to say." Let me know if I have ever participated in such generalizations about the American Right, based upon such anecdotes.

Gosh, the perpetual preacher and lecturer asks me to "get off my high horse." As usual, I speak to the "topic," the OP and the posts below it. But your topic is another poster, or what allegedly happens in some other threads on the forum.

I have to ask. Can you explain in a coherent, supported, and factual basis to the statement:

The reason I ask this is simply that you are almost in effect in the same bed as Ward Churchill: making emotionally tinged statements that feed to inner feelings without regards to any actual factual basis. This is what Ward Churchill has done, and by these statements you have done yourself.

Second, how would you go about addressing the fact that so many dictators have been openly embraced by Republicans as well?

I do not see a very strong embrace of Zelaya. In fact it seems that there has been a very tepid response indeed from this administration. Yet the fact remains that there has been a military coup that removed an elected president. The politics of the president should matter to no one, it is the principle that matters. I think the irony may be lost here.

How can you deny that Obama and Carter embrace Ahmadinejad, Chavez, and Castro? Have you ever heard either say that they support the power of the people in these countries? Carter validated an obviously fraudulent election years ago where he later admitted something to the effect that he didn't want to stir the pot and cause civil unrest. Obama could not even bring himself to criticize the leadership in Iran after another likely fraudulent election. Why should Obama or Carter give the time of day to Castro when he has done so much destruction in Cuba? ... as if he is such a humanitarian! Zelaya is merely a coming chapter in the same book! I do not agree with US support for any dictator by any liberal or conservative president, such as was done with the Shah of Iran and at one time Saddam Hussein. The only exception might be when such an alliance might serve to protect the US (remember our alliance with Russian in WWII?). I don't believe that most conservative rants are based on emotion although some certainly are. I do believe that most liberal arguments that surface in the liberal mainstream media are quick-hitting, emotional talking points that serve to indoctrinate the ignorant masses.

Now, back to the point of this thread... Is Ward Churchill's calling victims of 911 Eichmann's all that far removed from Obama's validating Ahmadinejad's denial of the holocaust and desire to destroy Israel. Obama's show of respect for Ahmadinejad by meeting on his terms symbolically ranks him as a deserving peer... what a joke!

It's too bad that Idi Amin is long gone... Obama would have loved that guy!

That's not what he's saying. He's saying taking Ward Churchhill and using him as an example for "All liberals" is wrong because he is an extreme. It'd be like saying All Conservatives need to learn they can't blame things like 9/11 or Katrina on "The Gays" because one extreme conservative made the comment.

It's never all of any group, but it is all of what you SEE from any group that controls most of their actions, and the extremists of the left are running the party in Congress and the WH.

"He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
"Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.